300 vs 302 mpg / power

have a choice between these 2 motors, from the search I can see there has been a few threads, but the idea I am having is to put a turbo / supercharger on a 300 to see what we can get. anyone know which motor has less reciprocating mass? i would believe that the 300 has less internal weight due to the fact of 2 less cylinders, but not sure, now that to me says less parasitic power loss, which would mean more mpg / power then the 302, is that right or am I missing something?

 

Ive had both in F150s and the mileage is pretty close to the same, 16.5 or so at best running 75 without an OD trans. The 300s are tough as hell, Ill give them that, they run forever

 

I love 300s but:

The 300 crank weighs about 83 pounds.

The 300 stroke is 3.980" vs 3.000 for the 302. That means way higher piston velocities and ifd you are going to drive up the RPMs with a turbo you will reach maximum piston speeds sooner with the 300.

I think the bottom line is do you want a unique powerplant under the hood (if you're running a hood) or do you want to make the most power for your dollar. For unique the 300 wins. For a boulevard terror I'd go with the (ho hum) 302.

 

don't need to be unique... and idunno how unique a 300 is, its only under 5 out of 10 f150 hoods... how much does a 302 crank weigh? i was just figuring the 300 would have less internal power loss, and with that kinda stroke it won't need to rev, I was thinking of a very small turbo, which would top out at mid range rpms, its not really a hot rod, just a hauler, and I want the best possible mpg's, I could go both ways still, it seems these motors are pretty close to one and other.

 

everyone has a Vmotor. 300 cu. inch 6 is a great motor and tough (7 main bearings) best of luck - whichever you choose...jack

 

Sorry, but if fuel costs are a major factor, aren't you in the wrong hobby?
No offence meant
Cheeers
Rod

 

lol none taken, but need to at least give it a fighting chance

 

Had both 300 for my money, just wish they were plentifull here

 

I have a 300 its ok plans call for changing to 302

 

300 cid I6 fords love boost.

With a turbo, there is no reason to rev the crap out of it - quite the opposite in fact.

My DD is a 300 six. Good mileage in a loaded service truck with a C6 auto - 12 around town.

B.

 

the 300 i6 is a true truck motor, high nickel block, realy tough, but is it a low rev torque monster. more speed equip for 302, turbo,s and superchargers just cost to much

 

You are trying to compare apples and oranges. The 300 is designed as and most often used as a truck motor. That means long stroke, lots of rotating mass, low rpms, and an intake and exhaust track that is deigned to keep the air velocity up in order to build TORQUE at low rpms. The 302 on the other hand is a large bore, short stroke car motor that builds horsepower by being able to rev past 6000 rpms (or more depending on valve train, heads, etc.). Opposite motors designed for opposite purposes.

If you are worried about mpg, stop worrying about internal parasitic losses, it is a very small part of the overall equation. Concentrate on compression ratio (as high as your fuel will allow) and efficient air flow. Engines are air pumps, getting the air in and out of the cylinders as efficiently as possible will do as much for you mpg and power as anything else. The turbo idea goes a long ways in helping this. The 302 has virtually unlimited aftermarket head options, the 300 you will have to spend some time porting and polishing that big slab of cast iron in order for it to flow decent numbers.

Personally, I would chose the 300 (see avatar), but then I like being different and don't mind a challenge.

Good Luck and keep us posted.

 

I have run and owned both but if I have to make a choice I will take the 302/5.0 hands down . Performance parts are a lot cheaper and easier to find thanks to the Mustang . Weight wise the 300 is lighter but in the end if you want an engine that can make all the power you want , then use the 302 .
If you want a engine that is durable , runs strong and if you want a in-line 6 , then the 300 is the way to go .
It all depends on what you are looking for . There is aftermarket performance parts for both engines but the 302/5.0 has a ton more made and very easy to find used and new forsale anyplace . I just prefer V8 engines in hot rods ! But that's my choice .
I will admit that an in-line looks much better in a roadster !
If you are topping the 300 engine off with a turbo for power , then I would just use a 302 with a mild cam to do that trick for me . Back up with an overdrive trans for good gas milage as well . Much cheaper to build as well !

Retro Jim

 

If you want a truck engine go with 300,but remember its longer overall and will be much harder to fit.
I have a 300 in my 1 ton stepvan and its exactly what it needs.
I personally would only use the 300 in a truck to work around town or farm,not cruising around or any speed.


btw,whats it going into?

 

Well honestly its going to be in a truck, to do truck type things, it doesn't need to be a hot rod, but being able to have a little fun with it wouldn't be bad either, I was reading in another post that one can run 390 hp pistons for some high compression in a 300, which obviously wouldn't be good for forced induction, but N/A is a route i can go too, dunno, still quite unsure of which way I want to go, both engines are runners, but this will be used as a truck, not really as a hot rod...

 

and its going into a 53 international with an olds 12 bolt out back, it will have a ZF 5 speed behind it

 

Car Craft magazine ran an excellent article last year about a 300 powered Ford Maverick. It was a budget built 10 second car. Pretty damn neat, the guy hardly did any motor work let alone a rebuild. Don't assume a 302 is the way to go, you would be hard pressed to do the same thing to a stock 302 and make that much power that cheap.

http://www.carcraft.com/featuredvehicles/ccrp_1108_1971_ford_maverick/viewall.html

 

wow.. well it just so happens i have a similar sized turbo laying around, I really like where this is going...

 

and it so happens that hes round here.. anyone know em? I wanna take a look at this car....

 

As noted above, with super/turbocharging you can size the thing for lots of boost at desired RPM. Adding lots of boost and power at low RPM is going to be far less stressful on an engine than getting power in at high RPM.
By the way...long ago and far way, maybe 1969-70 in Rod&Custom, there were articles on turbocharging the 300 by Ak Miller.

 

I'd look him up and just approach him, he's a car guy firstly; and a Maverick guy secondly.

Maverick guys seem to be a bit off the beaten path, but they're top notch people.

 

could always look em up in the phone book.. id like to talk to em and see how that car is doing now... have to look up dt466 AR ratios.

 

looks like the To4b has a .6 intake and a 1.14 exhaust, where as mine is .6 intake and 1.0 exhaust, that means it will spool up at a lower rpm? is that right?

 

In the early '70s the 300 six performed a little better than the 302 in a pick-up. That was apparently a side effect of meeting emissions regulations with existing hardware and technology. That exception I can't think of a situation where a vehicle wouldn't be faster with a 302 than a 300. There are lots of affordable go-fast pieces for the 302, not so much for the 300. Not sure if it's still available, it was possible to buy an aluminum Boss 351 based head for the 300. Those were expensive and required modifications to be made. The 300 has fairly spindly rods. They hold up fine in stock engines, but I wouldn't trust them if the engine's RPM range was increased more than a little.

 

I had a 300 six in my 76 ford f150 short wheel base van...it was straight drive and NO power steering....I had this van for about 100,000 miles....about 14 mpg is all I ever got....it had a 3.00 rear end....however...I could pull a boat and have about 6-7 of us in the van and go up a very steep curvy mtn road and 50mph is the slowest it would get then back up to 55 and 60...never gave an ounce of trouble...the people I sold it too went from NC to Mexico monthly to buy for their business and they told me they had to stop in texas on the way back and add a qt of oil...by that time, the van had over 200,000 miles on it.

 

you know that there is plenty of hop up parts for the stock engine in that truck right?

http://www.murphysmotorservice.com/ptractorprts.htm

 

I read the Car Craft build...5000 bucks for the whole car I guess. So you take a 110,000 mile engine as is,old rings,cast pistons,stock cam.Then ,if I'm reading correctly,you bolt on a turbo and run racing gas so you can push the boost to 25 PSI? am i correct about he raised the boost from 7-25 PSI? Interesting,I suppose all the forged pistons and special rings guys use for high boost is just a waste of money or the Ford 300 is one fuck of a special engine.

 

If it is for a truck, use the 300. I have built countless 302s, love them. But for a truck, a 302 isn't the best choice. I have a 300 in a F100 and it gets 18 mpg at 70 mph. It pulls strong down low, can't beat it. There really is no decision to be made if you want a truck engine.

 

The crank from an 87-93 Mustang weighs about 48-50 lbs.

 

Everything about the 300 is heavy and larger.The 300s were work horses.Mpg will be about the same.The vintage aspect of the 300 is better.The upper end power of the 302 will be more fun.